Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message
katsmeow said...

But it's all about not taking big steps to improve programming with OE, it's all about NOT making more features possible?

I literally never said this. And this summary of my statement couldn't be more untrue. I want to see a lot more things come to Euphoria. I want Euphoria to be a mainstream, fully-featured, stable and competent competitor to any other popular language available today. In fact, I am pretty sure I started my response to this thread with that same sentiment:

ghaberek said...

Euphoria is one of my most favorite things in the world and it's something I feel is Very Importantâ„¢ to the world. It's a language I wish more people used and I wish more people knew of and cared about and I truly believe it could be a great asset to developers everywhere.

katsmeow said...

So i made the analogy of OE being the fire, and Bach, OOEU, Phix, etc being simply white pine, or poplar, or dogwood, all being the same, on the same fire, the same place, the same language.

I think you've misinterpreted my "dialect" analogy. Spoken languages grow and evolve over time. Sometimes they branch off of each other to create new languages. Sometimes they die off with the people and cultures that used them. Regardless, the life cycle of any language is a thing that exists in the world, good, bad, or indifferent. And programming languages are really no different than that, except that they often live and die much faster than spoken languges.

katsmeow said...

It's getting to be as old as neaderthals dancing around the fire,

I have great aspirations and I am inclined to believe everyone else here aspires for great things as well. My failure to continue moving this project forward are not for want of aspirations. I like the features that Pete is implementing in Phix. Things I'd like to see in Euphoria include threads, classes, and a built in compiler, all of which Phix now has. But I have entirely different ideas on how they should behave or be implemented within Euphoria itself and Pete's heavy use of Assembly language make porting those things back to Euphoria almost entirely impossible, at least for me.

katsmeow said...

not aspiring to do more in computering.

I do plenty of "computering" elsewhere but unfortunately I find myself in a continuous Catch-22 paradox: I cannot use Euphoria for my work projects because it is not modern enough for those purposes, and I have not been able to bring Euphoria up to speed due to my continued effort on my work projects. What's kind of sad and ironic is that most of my work projects use WinForms, which itself is now considered to be "outdated" by more "modern" developers that I encounter.

katsmeow said...

Today, at least, fire is used to make car engines run, steam turbines make electricity. But OE cannot really do any more to munge data today than was done in a Vic20 or C64 or ZX80 or Apple 40 years ago.

I completely disagree with this statement. Firstly, because data munging hasn't really changed in the entire history of electronic computing. Aside from other branches of computer science like quantum computing and machine learning, all the data we ever process is still just some series of bytes and bits and I think Euphoria is still very well suited to that type of work. And second, because I have recently implemented several new tools for processing "modern" forms of data, such as my JSON, HTML, and template parsers. And I apologize if I have not communicated this enough recently, so I'll say it again: Euphoria MVC is mostly a testbed for features that I would like to eventually move to the Euphoria standard library.

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu